[Mono-list] Mono 2.6 for Ubuntu

Thu Jan 14 10:33:17 EST 2010

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:29 PM, Alan McGovern <alan.mcgovern at gmail.com>wrote:

> If the ubuntu devs are happy with installing one giant tarball as supplied
> my Novell, then it's amazingly simple to supply them with new packages every
> time Novell releases a new version of Mono.
>
>
Hey that sound pretty awesome if Novell could just provide a package that
allow us to install mono into /opt/mono (like mention in the parallel doc)
that would be awesome. Frankly speaking just to build libgdiplus-2.6 is
killing me already :) feel like I need to learn all these little thing
instead ready to say "Hello World !", HELP ! PLEASE

However, they are not happy. They have their own strict packaging guidelines
> and do a lot of extra work splitting the standard install into dozens of
> small individual packages. This is one of the reasons why Ubuntu/Debian lags
> behind.
>
You don't have to worry about that I download the package off mono-project I
am ready to take responsibility as long as the installation I allow me to it
in a parallel maner (I hope I am talking the right term)

>
> It's not up to Novell, or any project, to create packages for every distro
> under the sun (whether it be the most popular distro or least popular
> distro) when each distro has its own specific packaging policies which
> essentially means one unique package will have to be created using different
> rules for every distro. If you wish to employ someone to do that, feel free.
>
> Your examples with Chrome and gnome do aren't quite the same as mono
> though. Mono is a core framework. Changing that will affect multiple
> applications and can (potentially) cause things to stop working in strange
> and unusual ways if an application relies on a bug which was fixed. If you
> install a broken Chrome, all that's broken is Chrome. You don't end up with
> a dozen broken apps on your system.
>
> Alan.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 5:58 AM, daniel <trampster at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The ubuntu devs package and deploy for their release which happens every
>> 6 months. it is insane to say its up to them to package version released
>> between OS versions.
>>
>> Ubuntu comes with a packaged version on gnome do, which is fine, however
>> I choose to use a more recent version of gnome do so I use a PPA which
>> is supplied by the developers  (not the ubuntu devs)
>>
>> The fact that ubuntu/devian developers package mono for you for its OS
>> releases is a bonus, did Microsoft package up mono  and include it in
>> its Windows 7? NO! did Apple package up mono and include it in snow
>> leopard? no. So ubuntu is helping you guys out hugely but do you thank
>> them? no, you just expect more of them.
>>
>> I also use Chrome in ubuntu. Its not in the repros at all, when I wanted
>> to install chrome did google say... O sorry its up to ubuntu/debian to
>> package chrome for you, its not our fault if they don't. No, they
>> packaged it themselves and even provided different channels so I can
>> decide exactly how cutting edge I want to be.
>>
>> So you have to worry about a newer version breaking existing
>> applications, how is this different from on any other operating system?
>>
>> It's not up to the ubuntu devs to package new versions of mono for exist
>> OS releases, its up to the mono project to do this and provide it as a
>> PPA.
>>
>> The question you need to ask is, how important is the largest desktop
>> linux distribution to the mono project.
>>
>> At my work we started to port a .net application to mono, however it
>> need to run on ubuntu (8.04) do you know what version of mono is in
>> 8.04 its 1.2.6, everything for our app was supported in mono 2.4 but
>> mono 1.2.6? not even close. So we abandoned our efforts, I'm sure their
>> are lots of other people out there with similar stories. Those of us who
>> use ubuntu feel a little bit like second class citizens.
>>
>>
>>
>> B.R. wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Bálint Kardos <kardosbalint at gmail.com
>> > <mailto:kardosbalint at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >     Hi Stephen,
>> >
>> >     Fact 1: the provider decides on the virtualized platforms, not me.
>> >     They have Fedora, Ubuntu or Debian systems ready.
>> >
>> >     Fact 2: I've used Debian and Fedora for a decade, so I'm more
>> >     familiar with Ubuntu as with SuSe.
>> >
>> >     Fact 3: I've started working on merging all my sites/servers back
>> >     to Windows 2008.
>> >     It is a sad story, but the lack of real features on mono (Web
>> >     Services still has bugs for years, the LINQ implementation is a
>> >     horror etc.) makes it more and more hard to use it as a real
>> >     Production (not a toy playground) platform.
>> >
>> >
>> >     üdvözlettel
>> >     with regards
>> >
>> >     Kardos Bálint
>> >     _______________________________________
>> >     http://skaelede.hu 10 (0xA) év a magyar weben
>> >
>> >
>> > If there are web services bugs, file bugs--if nobody knows about them,
>> > they can't get fixed. Also, clarify what you mean by LINQ? LINQ to
>> > Objects is pretty simple and there's only so many ways to implement
>> > that, so I'm not sure how you can lay claim to that being a horror.
>> > LINQ to SQL is a different story, and a huge effort that is only now
>> > beginning to be integrated into Mono properly. You could also file
>> > bugs for those--once again, if nobody knows about them, they can't get
>> > fixed.
>> >
>> > --B.R.
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
>> > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ximian.com/pipermail/mono-list/attachments/20100114/146d5a13/attachment-0001.html 